Maleficium: A Game of Clerical Necromancy

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com

Klibbix!

Depraved Necromancer
Joined
Dec 18, 2020
Messages
688
Reaction score
1,695
edit - whoops, should have been in Design and Development

I'm have a one-track mind when it comes to games I want to design/play. I like Necromancy, games where every player has access to the same magic and games where players are given enough rope to hang themselves when it comes to, "trafficking with terrible powers."

I'm specifically interested in Clerical Necromancy, the Infernal Magic practiced by members of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages.

I'm using The Black Hack as a base and trying to make something playable. Here are some random generators for the Daemons who are the gatekeepers to all magic in the game.

As an example, I've rolled up a Countess (5HD) who will obey 1d4 Commands of each level from 1-5.. Using the tables, she is, "YAGNALAKRALL, the Woeful Countess of the Boiling Labyrinth." She appears as a, "Crab-clawed woman covered in pallid feathers." Her desire, the thing that she wants her Binder to do in exchange for returning her Binding Die to maximum, is Blasphemy.

1679676309126.png

1679676236092.png

1679676343485.png


1679676681227.png
 

Attachments

  • 1679675036259.png
    1679675036259.png
    229.6 KB · Views: 3
  • 1679675062802.png
    1679675062802.png
    136.2 KB · Views: 3
  • 1679675107401.png
    1679675107401.png
    293 KB · Views: 3
  • 1679675172205.png
    1679675172205.png
    430.7 KB · Views: 3
  • 1679676267538.png
    1679676267538.png
    100.1 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:
I love it! If I have a chance, I'll even contribute a table or two for your consideration, maybe something with the orders of demons (as opposed to rank within the order, which you have already), or one with astrological influences.
 
I love it! If I have a chance, I'll even contribute a table or two for your consideration, maybe something with the orders of demons (as opposed to rank within the order, which you have already), or one with astrological influences.

Please do, that would be fantastic! I'm tinkering with the Summoning/Binding/Commanding rules and I'll post them as well when I'm done.
 
Here are the current rules for Summoning, Binding, Commanding and Bargains. Not as pleased with how Bargains have turned out, but I think it may work in play.

1679756686078.png

1679756711352.png

1679756737512.png

1679756772177.png

1679756808829.png
 
And here are the 10 levels of Daemonic Commands. Essentially they are retitled Divine/Arcane spells from the Black Hack. I'll tinker with these over time to make them a little more unique but a lot of these already have analogues in the literature.

Both of the quotes below are from Tamar Herzig's article, "The Demons and the Friars: Illicit Magic and Mendicant Rivalry in Renaissance Bologna."

"Demons, who were generally believed to have supernatural knowledge of human affairs, could reveal the location of large sums of money or jewelry buried in secret places, and could also protect the treasure hunters from supernatural dangers."

"Treasure hunting was the most common pastime of clerical necromancers, and priests and friars continued to be the central figures in groups engaged in the pursuit of hidden riches in Northern Italy well into the seventeenth century."


The 2nd quote practically justifies dungeon-crawling for Clerical Necromancers!

1679841952929.png

1679841979245.png

1679842021746.png

1679842058944.png
 
Here's my small contribution--a chart to figure out which order of angels the demon belonged to before its fall. I suppose you could integrate this into the rules in some way, but at this stage I'm offering it just as a bit of 'color.'

As you can see, there are actually two charts. Both are based on the hierarchy of angels proposed by pseudo-Dionysius c. 500, which had become fairly authoritative in Western Europe by the 1200s. The first chart, which uses D8, omits the highest rank of angels, the seraphim, because theologians argued that no angel of that rank actually fell and became a demon--or, alternatively, that Satan was the only seraph that fell. The second chart, which uses a D10, includes all 9 orders, and also a possibility that a demon is partly of one order and partly of another (i.e., roll 2 orders). This doesn't make any theological sense, but it actually does show up in lists of demons from the 15th and 16th century.

You could make a more complex chart where previous rank as an angel was linked to the demon's current rank in hell. But in practice lists of demons don't reflect that kind of linkage. In fact, in an Italian list of c. 1500, Belial, who is described as a king of hell, is said to have come from the order of angels, the lowest rank of the angelic hierarchy.

Angelic Order Demons.png
 
Last edited:
Here's my small contribution--a chart to figure out which order of angels the demon belonged to before its fall. I suppose you could integrate this into the rules in some way, but at this stage I'm offering it just as a bit of 'color.'

As you can see, there are actually two charts. Both are based on the hierarchy of angels proposed by pseudo-Dionysius c. 500, which had become fairly authoritative in Western Europe by the 1200s. The first chart, which uses D8, omits the highest rank of angels, the seraphim, because theologians argued that no angel of that rank actually fell and became a demon--or, alternatively, that Satan was the only seraph that fell. The second chart, which uses a D10, includes all 9 orders, and also a possibility that a demon is partly of one order and partly of another (i.e., roll 2 orders). This doesn't make any theological sense, but it actually does show up in lists of demons from the 15th and 16th century.

You could make a more complex chart where previous rank as an angel was linked to the demon's current rank in hell. But in fact lists of demons don't reflect that kind of linkage. In fact, in an Italian list of c. 1500, Belial, who is described as a king of hell, is said to have come from the order of angels, the lowest rank of the angelic hierarchy.

View attachment 58353
This is amazing, thank you! I like both charts, especially since, as you mentioned, Demons appear on multiple lists. I think I prefer the d8 one as it does allow for the existence of Greater Powers (fallen Seraphim) that cannot be Summoned by mortals but nonetheless exist as rulers of Hell.
My ultimate goal is also to include tables that generate random Hells, so that will be a helpful addition!

I will definitely be putting this in with the other generators!
 
About the name chart:
I really like random charts like this, since coming up with names that sound good on the fly is difficult. The ones this chart produces are cool and have a vaguely Old Testament flavor--more so than the names of demons that show up in Late Medieval lists, for the most part.

I have a couple of questions. The middle elements from the chart all end in 'a' but some of the final elements begin with a vowel, either a or i. So the chart could yield results like Akkanraimag or Immcharaagar. Did you mean for the ai combination to be a diphthong? What about the aa combination? I assume when the element from column 1 ends in k and the element from the second column starts with it (e.g. Akk + Kruza) you just drop one of the ks.

The current system always produces names of 4 or 5 syllables. I would suggest a minor tweak to allow for shorter names. Roll a D6 and:
  • 1-3 means roll on all three columns
  • 4 means roll on columns 1 and 2 only
  • 5 means roll on columns 1 and 3 only
  • 6 means roll on columns 2 and 3 only
That would produce shorter names like Yalkula, Magprall, and Fazashem.
 
About the name chart:
I really like random charts like this, since coming up with names that sound good on the fly is difficult. The ones this chart produces are cool and have a vaguely Old Testament flavor--more so than the names of demons that show up in Late Medieval lists, for the most part.

I have a couple of questions. The middle elements from the chart all end in 'a' but some of the final elements begin with a vowel, either a or i. So the chart could yield results like Akkanraimag or Immcharaagar. Did you mean for the ai combination to be a diphthong? What about the aa combination? I assume when the element from column 1 ends in k and the element from the second column starts with it (e.g. Akk + Kruza) you just drop one of the ks.

The current system always produces names of 4 or 5 syllables. I would suggest a minor tweak to allow for shorter names. Roll a D6 and:
  • 1-3 means roll on all three columns
  • 4 means roll on columns 1 and 2 only
  • 5 means roll on columns 1 and 3 only
  • 6 means roll on columns 2 and 3 only
That would produce shorter names like Yalkula, Magprall, and Fazashem.

Both excellent points, I've tried to incorporate them here. I love the idea of names differing in length so that's a great suggestion.

1680031736904.png
 
As to the ranks of demons, you've done a good job of being creative. The lists I know of only list 7 ranks, though because they don't always give the same 7 ranks, you can extract 8 in total--so there's a need to invent 4 more. I note that you've omitted 1 of the traditional ranks, 'president' and that you have 3 different types of dukes (duke, archduke, grand duke). I might suggest a slight change, if you want to reflect traditional rankings a bit more closely:
  • Squire
  • Knight
  • Lord
  • Baron
  • Viscount
  • Count
  • Marquis
  • Duke
  • Palatine
  • President
  • Prince
  • King
I've marked the ranks that don't actually show up in the lists I've seen in italics. Including both lord and baron is a bit of a stretch (perhaps lord should be banneret instead), and palatine should be modifier to some other rank (like count), but what the heck. Oddly, contemporary lists often claim that a particular demon has two ranks--king and count, or duke and marquis, etc. This makes no sense if you view the titles as ranks in a hierarchy, but more if you see them as linked to rulership over some part of hell, or some section of the demonic forces. So demon X could be king of a certain part of hell, but duke of another, much as Late Medieval and Early Modern rulers accumulated various titles.

I've only included male forms for the titles because the lists do this also--they are quite happy to say that demon Y is a duke but appears in the form of a woman. The demons themselves have no real sex, of course, and can take on either one as desired.
 
This is fantastic stuff! Squire is a more than welcome addition, I didn't really like Soldier and I was wracking my brain to find a more appropriate title. Considering it's a lowly 1HD Daemon, Squire fits perfectly.

So now, thanks to your suggestions, the enhanced list looks like this:

1680041609027.png

I'm also mostly through the first Brother Cadfael novel, A Morbid Taste for Bones and it's inspired me to add a random Relic Generator for the Clerical Necromancers to pursue. The actual rules for the Relics' Attribute are still under review...but the idea is that they'll each have a Usage Die attached to them that will slowly degrade with each use.

Another goal is to have a random Saint generator to go along with the relic, and possibly even rules for Invoking Saints.

1680041938702.png
 
One thing that occurs to me is that--if I'm understanding your system correctly--summoning demons is done only to bind them so that they will later produce magical effects for you. A lot of the lists of demons from the era give the impression that another main reason to summon demons is to learn things from them--the lists will detail what particular subjects a demon teaches, so to speak, or what kind of questions it answers.

Would you be interested in including something like that in your rules? I was tinkering with it a bit last night, but didn't get too far, in part because the rules-implementation would depend a lot on how the system handles skills.
 
I'm very interested in adding these ideas!

The Black Hack (without any add-ons) has no skill system in place other than Testing relevant Attributes. All Tests are made with one of the six traditional Attributes, and rolling under one of them on a d20 is a Success. Advantage and Disadvantage (in my hack called Blessed and Cursed respectively) allow 2d20 to be rolled, taking the better of the two results.

As for Daemons imparting knowledge, it would be pretty easy to add a skill system where any Test involving a "skill" is Blessed or allows a reroll etc. So, for example, if Baragoth possesses the knowledge of Cooking, the Necromancer who has him Bound could Command the Daemon to teach him that Skill and then all Tests going forward that involved Cooking would get the assigned benefit (Blessing or some other bonus). You could also make it as granular as desired, so that Cooking becomes Cooking (baking), or Cooking (roasting), or even Melee (Long Swords) etc etc.


The problem here is that Necromancers could fairly quickly gain a great number of Skills, unless there was some other measure in place to avoid this. Or not, frankly I like games where the PCs are competent so that could work.

I had also tinkered around with the idea that Daemons could also just impart XP to Necromancers as a Command, like some abstract measure of knowledge, and answer questions posed to them with X chance of lying etc etc.

At the end of the day, I'd like to incentivize dealing with Daemons above all else, since the hope is that they become NPCs in their own right (especially since they can enter the material world as a result of their Bindings being broken) and that dealing with them increases a PC's weakness to Temptation, thus providing the possibility for things to go awry and generate new complications.

I've added this excellent 1 page Black hack reference sheet made by Vandel Arden so you can see the system. I am not a confident game designer, so I find games like the Black Hack very appealing because of their lite nature and they hew pretty close to how my games run when I am not DMing a more crunchy system

1680104820541.png
 
Last edited:
Thanks very much! I’ll look the reference sheet over later today or this evening.

As to the problem of necromancers gaining too much proficiency too easily, I think one could divide the knowledge demons provide into two types.
  • Specific pieces of information (‘where is my enemy X right now?’ ‘Who stole my horse last night?’ ‘Translate this short text for me’). The necromancer could write the answers down or remember them—once you have the information, you have it forever (though it may soon be out of date).
  • Skills or learned abilities. These I would say, for game-balance reasons, are not permanent. So a necromancer could conjure a demon to learn a language, and become a skilled speaker/writer of it—but the ability would wear off.
 
Thanks very much! I’ll look the reference sheet over later today or this evening.

As to the problem of necromancers gaining too much proficiency too easily, I think one could divide the knowledge demons provide into two types.
  • Specific pieces of information (‘where is my enemy X right now?’ ‘Who stole my horse last night?’ ‘Translate this short text for me’). The necromancer could write the answers down or remember them—once you have the information, you have it forever (though it may soon be out of date).
  • Skills or learned abilities. These I would say, for game-balance reasons, are not permanent. So a necromancer could conjure a demon to learn a language, and become a skilled speaker/writer of it—but the ability would wear off.

Both great ideas. The first one can just be handled narratively and the second I think could be modeled with Usage Dice.

Brother John wants to learn German so he conjures up Fazashem and Commands the Daemon to impart knowledge of the language upon him. Now Brother John writes, "German d6" on his sheet and whenever he uses his knowledge of the language he rolls his Usage Die afterwards. Since Usage Dice get are triggered to "downgrade" whenever a 1 or 2 is rolled, Brother John's knowledge of German is not inexhaustible and eventually disappears. He needs to Command Fazashem once again if he wants this knowledge back.

This would require a change to some of the Commands (i.e., renamed Spells) since one of them essentially is Comprehend Languages. I think a shift of the Commands towards truly supernatural effects (like flying or invisibility) and the removal of any mundane ones would be helpful.
 
Both great ideas. The first one can just be handled narratively and the second I think could be modeled with Usage Dice.

This would require a change to some of the Commands (i.e., renamed Spells) since one of them essentially is Comprehend Languages. I think a shift of the Commands towards truly supernatural effects (like flying or invisibility) and the removal of any mundane ones would be helpful.

Employing the usage die is a neat idea for this. I had imagined something more mechanical--the necromancer forgets the skill a day after learning it, or something similar--but your idea is more flavorful.

On a different note, should a necromancer be able to order a demon to possess someone? Some of the 'commands' give a limited control over others, but possession would be more total--and would last as long as the demon stayed in the target, or until it was exorcised. To make things a bit more interesting, I'd suggest that:
  • Possession is not automatic; the target gets to resist with some sort of check (wisdom or intelligence, I guess), with perhaps chances for later checks every so often (every Sunday? Every saint's day (could be multiple in a week)?
  • While the demon is possessing an individual, it cannot or perhaps will not perform magic for the necromancer. The demon will still obey the necromancer's mundane commands and may do magic on its own initiative, or for its own purposes.
  • If the necromancer wishes to end the possession, some sort of check is required; if it fails, the demon has found a new home and is free of the necromancer's control.
 
Daemons should absolutely have the ability to possess others! My original intention was to have Possession only as a result on the Sundered Binding Table (see below for my first attempt at it), but I think the idea that a Necromancer can Command a Daemon to Possess someone else just drips with flavour (especially the idea that they get to Test every Sunday, for example).

I think a regular Test is a good idea, and that could quite simply replace some of the other Commands in the lists. There would need to be some sort of measure that limited it, since having PCs easily Possess other PCs could get tiresome.

I'm also toying with the idea that Daemons can't stay in the material world for long without possessing a body (or corpse).

1680122050462.png
 
I think a regular Test is a good idea, and that could quite simply replace some of the other Commands in the lists. There would need to be some sort of measure that limited it, since having PCs easily Possess other PCs could get tiresome.

I'm also toying with the idea that Daemons can't stay in the material world for long without possessing a body (or corpse).
On the issue of possessing other pcs, one way around this would be to say that, if you have a demon bound to your service, you can use it to resist possession--maybe some sort of test between the two demons, or you add the rank of the demon you have bound to your Wisdom (or Intelligence) stat when making the roll, or something like that. That doesn't protect pcs that aren't necromancers, of course.

As far as demon embodiment goes, I like the idea that any demon which is bound to you has to have a physical receptacle to contain it: a ring, a bottle, a lamp, mirror, sword, etc. Perhaps even a tattoo, though that's more cinematic--you wouldn't find many tattooed people in Late Medieval Europe, I'd guess.

Contemporary ideas were that demons could either animate dead bodies or (more commonly) manufacture bodies out of solidified air and moisture. These bodies could be as strong as desired, since they did not move things by physical means, exactly, but by the demonic spirits' natural ability to control motion. Incubi and Succubi used such bodies to do their business with people, of course.
 
I also love the idea of Daemons Bound into objects or other people.

Could do something like this:

Daemons cannot stay long in the world of flesh without some sort of anchor.

When a Daemon is Bound, it must have a Vessel to tie it to the material world.

A Vessel can be: an Object or Host.

Objects must be of fine or remarkable make. There is no Test required to Bind Daemons to an Object, and once they are within they can be Commanded as normal. If an Object containing a Bound Daemon is destroyed, the Daemon is free and you must immediately roll on the Sundered Binding Table. Weapons containing Daemons are magical and their Damage Die is one step higher. Using them is dangerous however, and any Critical Failure on a Teat automatically lowers the Daemon’s Binding Die by one step.

Hosts are living Vessels, human or otherwise. In order to Bind a Daemon into a living Host, the Daemon must succeed on a Test to Possess them. Every Sunday, or upon any other Holy Day, the Daemon must Test again to maintain their Possession. Once inside a Host, a Daemon may be Commanded as normal. Should the Host be killed, immediately roll on the Sundered Binding Table.
 
That's cool! I'd suggest a couple of tweaks.

The current system, if I understand it correctly, is that first the necromancer summons the demon (which requires a test), then binds the demon (another test), and then has it at his or her beck and call--the necromancer can give commands (i.e., make the demon in effect cast spells), which requires a roll on the binding die.

I would complicate this just a little bit, keeping summoning the same as now, but after the summoning succeeds the necromancer has a choice, either to impel the demon or bind it.
  • Impelling basically forces the demon to do something short-term--either answer some questions, teach a skill or ability, or perform one or more of the commands (spells) right now. The demon then departs.
  • Binding makes the demon permanently available to the necromancer, allowing him or her to command the demon (i.e., make it cast spells). It always requires the demon be bound to some vessel; demons won't, or can't, stay around without this.
Since impelling gets the necromancer a good deal less than binding does, the test for it should be easier, and the consequences of failing the test less dire.

As for using living beings as vessels, I like your proposed rules for unintelligent creatures--they basically allow you to make the demon into a familiar, by binding it into a cat, weasel, owl, whatever. I'm not sure about binding it into a human being (or other intelligent creature, if you are going to have nonhuman races). My preference would be that, once a demon is possessing a person, the necromancer cannot use that demon for commands (spells), though it will have to obey his or her orders to do mundane things. Mechanically, I suppose 'possess intelligent being' could be one of the commands, so the necromancer could either impel a demon to do it, or command a bound demon to do so.
 
As for asking demons for information (as distinct from learning skills from them), I've had a few thoughts. Lists of demons often specify what sort of information each one will provide--the contents are a mixture of what one might think demons would know and subjects of interest to magicians (like the location of buried treasure, as you've noted above). I would conceptualize the lists as a combination of what the demon knows and chooses to reveal--a given demon might know much about a wide variety of subjects, but it only is willing to answer questions about some of them.

Anyway, here is an attempt at a chart for what subjects a given demon will answer questions about:
Demon Information Types.png

Since so far the game system doesn't use the demon's previous position in the hierarchy of angels for anything but color, I thought it would be interesting for it to affect how many rolls on the chart above a given demon gets. In fact, I came up with two possibilities--the first respects the traditional division of angelic orders into threes (though the last group is just two, since there are no seraphim among the demons), while the other doesn't:

Demons Information-Types by Order.png

To add flavor, we could assume that some orders of angels (and hence demons) are associated with certain kinds of knowledge. This does not mean they get extra rolls, but that one of their rolls is automatically assigned to a certain result, as follows:
  • Angels and archangels were (before the fall) messengers; one of their results will always be either #3, #4, #5 (which deal with individuals), or #8 (which includes music and languages).
  • Principalities and dominions were linked to human realms or states and thus will always have #7 (history, politics, etc.) as one of their results.
  • Powers and virtues will always have either #6 (handicrafts, etc.) or #9 (science, etc.) among their results.
  • Because of their previous closeness to the divinity, thrones and cherubim will always have #10 (religion, theology, etc.) as one of their results.
 
As for asking demons for information (as distinct from learning skills from them), I've had a few thoughts. Lists of demons often specify what sort of information each one will provide--the contents are a mixture of what one might think demons would know and subjects of interest to magicians (like the location of buried treasure, as you've noted above). I would conceptualize the lists as a combination of what the demon knows and chooses to reveal--a given demon might know much about a wide variety of subjects, but it only is willing to answer questions about some of them.

Anyway, here is an attempt at a chart for what subjects a given demon will answer questions about:
View attachment 58428

Since so far the game system doesn't use the demon's previous position in the hierarchy of angels for anything but color, I thought it would be interesting for it to affect how many rolls on the chart above a given demon gets. In fact, I came up with two possibilities--the first respects the traditional division of angelic orders into threes (though the last group is just two, since there are no seraphim among the demons), while the other doesn't:

View attachment 58429

To add flavor, we could assume that some orders of angels (and hence demons) are associated with certain kinds of knowledge. This does not mean they get extra rolls, but that one of their rolls is automatically assigned to a certain result, as follows:
  • Angels and archangels were (before the fall) messengers; one of their results will always be either #3, #4, #5 (which deal with individuals), or #8 (which includes music and languages).
  • Principalities and dominions were linked to human realms or states and thus will always have #7 (history, politics, etc.) as one of their results.
  • Powers and virtues will always have either #6 (handicrafts, etc.) or #9 (science, etc.) among their results.
  • Because of their previous closeness to the divinity, thrones and cherubim will always have #10 (religion, theology, etc.) as one of their results.

This is absolutely amazing stuff! Thank you so much for contributing this wonderfully detailed work, I'm adding it to the existing rules and will post it when it is finished. I love the chart of information, it's very flavourful. I'm excited to try this out!
 
I have to still tinker with this, but this is what I'm imagining for how Impelling would work. Impelling Daemons has no real consequence (aside from being an intrinsically act). There should also be some sort of financial cost to these rituals, like, for example (in a world that uses GP), 100gp x HD of Daemon for materials or something similar.

1680193007704.png

1680193026125.png

1680193038617.png
 
I like this a lot. I've been mulling over some of the mechanics for asking questions, and I like your solution to the problem. It would make sense to me to interpret the word 'question' rather broadly, so that it might extend to more than one precise query, allowing follow-ups. So, for example, if a necromancer summoned a demon to ask about a rival's plans, this could involve additional questions about when and where the rival is planning to carry out a scheme, or something like that. Otherwise players have to engage in the sort of long, legalistic, multi-clause statement you can get with, say, wishes. But all the follow-up questions need to be closely related to the initial query and its overall meaning.

Alternatively, the rule could just be a set number of questions (3 has its resonance, but one could say 1D6). Or the rule could be that you can continue asking questions until the Will Test is failed, with some addition to your roll for each additional question (+2? +3?) so failure becomes more likely as you proceed.

I'd worked out some procedures for whether the demon would actually know the answer to the questions posed to it, based on the idea that individual demons know a lot, but not everything--and that the higher their order before the Fall, the more information they have. But I think that's an unnecessary complication, and would add yet another die roll (I actually came up with a chart for it), so it's better off scrapped.

As a bit of descriptive color--it might be a little hard to believe that a given demon lord would be familiar with specific human individuals (the sort of knowledge you get from #3-#5 on the chart). But of course all of these major demons are supposed to have many subordinates at their beck and call--many lists of demons include how many 'legions' each named demon commands. So I imagine that when the necromancer asks a question about some individual, the demon being interrogated crooks a talon (or something similar) and one of his underlings appears to whisper the needed information in its ear, or read it from a scroll made of human skin, etc.
 
I like this a lot. I've been mulling over some of the mechanics for asking questions, and I like your solution to the problem. It would make sense to me to interpret the word 'question' rather broadly, so that it might extend to more than one precise query, allowing follow-ups. So, for example, if a necromancer summoned a demon to ask about a rival's plans, this could involve additional questions about when and where the rival is planning to carry out a scheme, or something like that. Otherwise players have to engage in the sort of long, legalistic, multi-clause statement you can get with, say, wishes. But all the follow-up questions need to be closely related to the initial query and its overall meaning.

Alternatively, the rule could just be a set number of questions (3 has its resonance, but one could say 1D6). Or the rule could be that you can continue asking questions until the Will Test is failed, with some addition to your roll for each additional question (+2? +3?) so failure becomes more likely as you proceed.

I'd worked out some procedures for whether the demon would actually know the answer to the questions posed to it, based on the idea that individual demons know a lot, but not everything--and that the higher their order before the Fall, the more information they have. But I think that's an unnecessary complication, and would add yet another die roll (I actually came up with a chart for it), so it's better off scrapped.

As a bit of descriptive color--it might be a little hard to believe that a given demon lord would be familiar with specific human individuals (the sort of knowledge you get from #3-#5 on the chart). But of course all of these major demons are supposed to have many subordinates at their beck and call--many lists of demons include how many 'legions' each named demon commands. So I imagine that when the necromancer asks a question about some individual, the demon being interrogated crooks a talon (or something similar) and one of his underlings appears to whisper the needed information in its ear, or read it from a scroll made of human skin, etc.

Ah those are good ideas for the Questions!

Could say, "After a Daemon has been successfully Impelled to answer a Question, you may push your luck to ask another. For every subsequent successful WILL Test a Daemon will answer a question relevant to their domain of knowledge. If, however, you fail one of these additional WILL Tests then you must immediately roll on the Sundered Binding Table".

The flavour for how Daemons would know some of the answers is great! I especially like the idea of them asking a subordinate.
 
I've been thinking more about the relationship between a demon's former angelic order and its current status in the diabolic ranks. While lists of demons don't show much correlation between the two, some link does make sense. So rather than simply rolling a D8 for angelic order, I've come up with a table that takes the current status in hell into account. It's based on a D20 roll:

Angel Order Demon D20.jpg

I'm not entirely happy with it, but it's a start, anyway.
 
I think it looks great and adds flavour. It also makes the Daemons generated feel more coherent and integrated with the whole theme! I will add it to the google doc!
 
By the way, I noticed that the rules make frequent references to Will tests. Will is not one of characteristics in the Black Hack, AFAIK. Are you planning to add it, or will it replace one of the existing characteristics, like Wisdom?
 
Yes indeed, Will just replaces Wisdom. I figured it makes more sense, in a magical way, since Intelligence covers smarts as well as Lore and Will can be determination and resistance to Infernal Magic.

My original idea was to rename the Attributes in Latin, but I feel that might just be more confusing in the long run.
 
Yes indeed, Will just replaces Wisdom. I figured it makes more sense, in a magical way, since Intelligence covers smarts as well as Lore and Will can be determination and resistance to Infernal Magic.

My original idea was to rename the Attributes in Latin, but I feel that might just be more confusing in the long run.
Yeah, that kind of renaming sounds neat, but can ultimately be more trouble than it's worth--depending on your players, at least.

One of the areas of knowledge for demons is 'the future.' This fits with contemporary grimoires, but can be hard to handle in an RPG context. I'm not sure whether it's worthwhile to make up a system for dealing with it or not. When I suggested it, I had in mind the 'standard line' on demonic knowledge of the future, which as I understand it is something like this:
  • Demons do not have the kind of absolute knowledge of future events that the divine has, particularly for contingent events. But since they have great knowledge of the world and can have very great insight into what individuals are up to and plan, they can often make very good predictions.
  • These are best/most accurate for large-scale natural events, like the weather, plagues, etc. Part of the reasoning here is that these are heavily influenced by astrological forces, which demons can/do know about.
  • Predictions about large-scale human events--will there be a war? Is the price of lead about to rise?--are not as sure, but still fairly reliable.
  • Predictions about individual people and their actions are less certain. The 'standard line' is that demons cannot actually read minds, but since they can observe people 24-7 unseen and study what they say and how they act, they can know a great deal about their attitudes, intentions, etc.
 
Yeah, that kind of renaming sounds neat, but can ultimately be more trouble than it's worth--depending on your players, at least.

One of the areas of knowledge for demons is 'the future.' This fits with contemporary grimoires, but can be hard to handle in an RPG context. I'm not sure whether it's worthwhile to make up a system for dealing with it or not. When I suggested it, I had in mind the 'standard line' on demonic knowledge of the future, which as I understand it is something like this:
  • Demons do not have the kind of absolute knowledge of future events that the divine has, particularly for contingent events. But since they have great knowledge of the world and can have very great insight into what individuals are up to and plan, they can often make very good predictions.
  • These are best/most accurate for large-scale natural events, like the weather, plagues, etc. Part of the reasoning here is that these are heavily influenced by astrological forces, which demons can/do know about.
  • Predictions about large-scale human events--will there be a war? Is the price of lead about to rise?--are not as sure, but still fairly reliable.
  • Predictions about individual people and their actions are less certain. The 'standard line' is that demons cannot actually read minds, but since they can observe people 24-7 unseen and study what they say and how they act, they can know a great deal about their attitudes, intentions, etc.

It's an interesting question! I think all of your points are useful when determining the accuracy of questions posed. Rules for Divination in RPGs have never really grabbed me and since the base rules of the Black Hack assume a traditional GM-as-omnipotent-information-giver, I think the system should generally be by GM fiat.

Ask a Daemon a question and the GM answers it as best they can. It seems to me that it'd be easy to explain too, since if the PCs do nothing to avert the proposed future then the GM just has it happen.

"Lord Barstock was poisoned by Lady Barstock after all, just like the Fiend said it would be!"

And if they actively work to change it happening, then the GM falls back on, "Barstock would have been poisoned if you, Friar Naples, hadn't intervened."

I'm just musing out loud here, I'm sure any GM who's run a game with divination can explain it easily, or in their own understanding of how they'd play it.

Luckily, in historical games we have a big list of future events to fall back on!

In games where the players are more participatory in game events, narrative rpgs or what have you, I do love the idea of having players narrate future events and then getting benefits when they help it occur or penalities if it doesn't come to pass. Obviously, this doesn't work here.

Edit: Before I started working the Demonic angle of magic, I had an idea for a sort of build-your-own-spirit-divination system.

Necromancers, possessing at least the intact skull of their desired target, could call up spirits of the departed (possessing the same Hit Dice they did in life) and then 'spend' each HD in succession to either: gain 100xp (xp being some sort of abstracted measure of Gnosis) or ask a GM-answered question regarding what the spirit knew while alive.

Since PCs could just raid graveyards, making it pretty hard for GM to know exactly what each spirit might or might not know, I thought instead that PCs could narrate "Secrets" gleaned from the Summoned Spirit, spending a number of HD (depending on the importance of the Secret) to impose 'facts' on the campaign world.

For example, if a PC summoned up the spirit of a 7HD King after an arduous quest to find his skull in a royal crypt, they could 'spend' 4HD to gain 400xp, describing how the shade of the King imparts some nebulous esoteric knowledge upon them, and then spend the remaining 3 HD to learn player-defined Secrets like, "the king reveals to me the location of his Queen's skull," "the king reveals to me where Hintok the merchant hides his riches," or, "the king reveals to me where Blagoona the Maid will be on the Winter Solstice," etc etc

Maybe the GM hasn't defined if Hintok even has any hidden riches, or where Blagoona will be at that given time, but now they know that those Secrets have become facts.

Anyway, not sure if that would even work, but I was toying with the idea. Obviously with multiple PCs, a GM would have a ton of crap to keep track of, but I thought the idea was interesting at least.
 
Last edited:
That's very cool, and reminds me of Lovecraft's novella "The Strange Case of Charles Dexter Ward," where colonial-era necromancers are doing just that--digging up the dead to learn their secrets.
 
One other thing I was wondering; are necromancers intended to be just one class among others in the game, or is it meant to be a game about necromancers, with all p.c.s being that class? Connected to that, is all magic the result of demons doing things, or are other types of spells possible?
 
One other thing I was wondering; are necromancers intended to be just one class among others in the game, or is it meant to be a game about necromancers, with all p.c.s being that class? Connected to that, is all magic the result of demons doing things, or are other types of spells possible?

I know my preference would be an all Necromancer game. You wouldn't need to worry about balance in that respect, and it would mean that the game could focus on unearthing knowledge, rather than just Gold Pieces or what have you. I know that the Black Hack might not be the best game for a character-driven saga, but if all PCs are on the same page regarding what their ultimate goals are (like discovering the Names of higher HD Daemons, dealing with Daemons run amok from failed Tests, etc) then you can better highlight the themes of Clerical Necromancy.

That being said, you could also just have it replace the Conjuror and Cleric classes from the base game and leave it at that (with the addition of Damnation as a 7th stat). The game's pretty rules lite, so no problem there.

Regarding other magic, I would love to have the knowledge and inspiration needed to write up a satisfying Alchemy system to go along with the Summoning and Commanding rules. In addition, I was thinking about splitting the Daemonic Commands and altering the rules to allow PCs to Summon and Command Angels as well.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top